DaddyBo,
You've applied standard baseball logic but it isn't backed up by the facts. The decision as to whether a hitter should bunt or swing away with a runner on first should be based on slugging percentage and on base percentage. I couldn't tell you what the combination should be but it would have to be well under the major league average to justify a sacrifice bunt. Most likely that means that only pitchers and the very weakest hitters should be called on to sacrifice bunt.
Very detailed studies have shown that MLB teams score an average of .9769 runs when they start with a runner on first and no outs. When they have a runner on second and 1 out they score an average of .7545 runs. That means that if a MLB team could sacrifice bunt successfully every single time with a man on first they would score fewer runs.
However, teams don't sacrifice bunt successfully every time. What happens with an unsuccessful sac bunt? With 1 out and a man on first MLB teams score an average of .5987 runs an even further drop. How about if the bunter fouls off a couple pitches? Hitters are much less likely to reach base with two strikes on them than they are starting from a 0-0 count. All in all the sacrifice bunt with a runner on first and no outs is a very poor play unless you have a very weak hitter at the plate.
The situation changes slightly in the bottom of the 9th of a tie game or the bottom of the inning in extra innings as these statistics include multiple run innings and you are only trying for one run in the bottom of the 9th. Even so the sacrifice bunt with a runner on 1st is not generally a good strategy.
How about a runner on 2nd with no outs? MLB teams average 1.128 runs in that situation while they average 1.0623 runs with a runner on 3rd and 1 out. Once again not a good strategy with most hitters to sacrifice. In this particular situation in the bottom of the 9th of a tie game there may not be such a large bias against this move due to the need to only score one run.